Amazing news. I just read that Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords may be released from the hospital since being shot in the head a little over two weeks ago. My continued prayers to her, her family, and the many people impacted by this horrible tragedy.

During the aftermath, countless pundits, talking heads, and commentators have chimed in regarding the shooting. So there certainly hasn’t been a shortage of viewpoints shared. But I think one of the most convincing op-eds I’ve read to date comes by way of New York Times columnist Bob Herbert. Instead of focusing on the blame game or even the impact of inflammatory rhetoric in political circles, Herbert challenges us to examine the shootings in Arizona in a much broader context.

Says Mr. Herbert:

If we want to reverse the flood tide of killing in this country, we’ll have to do a hell of a lot more than bad-mouth a few sorry politicians and lame-brained talking heads. We need to face up to the fact that this is an insanely violent society. The vitriol that has become an integral part of our political rhetoric, most egregiously from the right, is just one of the myriad contributing factors in a society saturated in blood.

He goes on to provide harrowing statistics to validate his claim:

According to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, more than a million people have been killed with guns in the United States since 1968, when Robert Kennedy and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. were killed. That figure includes suicides and accidental deaths. But homicides, deliberate killings, are a perennial scourge, and not just with guns.

Excluding the people killed in the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, more than 150,000 Americans have been murdered since the beginning of the 21st century [bolded for emphasis]. This endlessly proliferating parade of death, which does not spare women or children, ought to make our knees go weak. But we never even notice most of the killings. Homicide is white noise in this society.

Finally, he offers his solutions:

If we were serious, if we really wanted to cut down on the killings, we’d have to do two things. We’d have to radically restrict the availability of guns while at the same time beginning the very hard work of trying to change a culture that glorifies and embraces violence as entertainment, and views violence as an appropriate and effective response to the things that bother us.

I give the man kudos. Lost in the endless debate examining the relationship between political rhetoric and violence are PRACTICAL solutions. In that spirit, I like how Mr. Herbert offers solutions which – at least on the surface – appear less partisan in nature and more pragmatic.

However, I think he – like many others – fall short of having discussions encompassing the full range of factors which contribute to the proliferation of violence. While stricter gun control laws and challenging a culture which fetishizing violence may lead to a decline in violence, leaving these as the only options is incomplete and irresponsible. Missing from the conversation – and what HAS been missing for a long while, IMO – are questions surrounding other relevant factors including mental health and poverty. Researchers have been investigating the roles mental illness and economic distress have played in violence for DECADES. But I haven’t noticed much public discourse commensurately reflective of that research. I could be wrong, but I just don’t see it.

The op-ed ends with a sad, but in my opinion, very real assessment of where we typically ‘go from here’:

For whatever reasons, neither the public nor the politicians seem to really care how many Americans are murdered — unless it’s in a terror attack by foreigners. The two most common responses to violence in the U.S. are to ignore it or be entertained by it. The horror prompted by the attack in Tucson on Saturday will pass. The outrage will fade. The murders will continue.

As much as I don’t want to accept this postulation as fact, it is. We witnessed another string of senseless deaths. The media was in a frenzy to report the news (not without adding their spin, of course). We were “outraged.” And now we’re moving on to the next story and perhaps indirectly, are waiting for the next tragedy.

Like this:

Related

Posts navigation

10 comments on “After Tuscon”

Hey Dre,
Rush Limbaugh (not one of my favorite people) ran a clip of all the people wishing him dead. Included were several Senators, House reps (all Dems) and comedians Bill Maher and Wanda Sykes. The idea that civility is the soul realm of the left is absolutely laughable. How many “jokes” have you heard about Cheney’s heart? Remember the pics you ran of Bush being burned in effigy and hanged? (For those reading: Andre DID NOT advocate that kind of behavior)It’s a problem on both sides. Having said that, why is it we hear virtually nothing about the Arizona Federal Judge John Roll who was killed, not wounded??? Is that because he was a Bush Appointee who was an opponent of abortion? Do those people deserve to die? He was threatened by hundreds of “civil” callers to Arizona talk shows (http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2009/07/09/20090709threats0709.html)

Hey Dre,
Let me add a summary point. I think the biggest problem we have is that we dehumanize, hate, and justify way too much. Just because we disagree with someone, or have an argument with them, is not reason enough to threaten them, or incite violence against them. We’re now a culture where people feal justified hating someone over nothing. I partially blame our media that is way too quick to paint every issue as a threat to our families, our livelyhood, our freedom, or our lives.

I think Mr. Herbert is correct both in taking a more macro view and in identifying the availability of guns and glorification of violence as the main reasons for both murder and murder by guns. While I agree that dealing with poverty and mental illness are important, these are secondary to the fact that society as a whole is more violent. Mental illness is present in other countries too but there are still fewer cases of mental illness related violence than the US and even less involving guns.

I read somewhere that 85% of the world’s serial killers are from America. Why is that? Because violence is somehow seen more as a means to react to problems and impulses and the means for violence is more readily available.

Hey LGS,
While I disagree with you on the “availability of guns” issue, (we’ve always had guns throughout our history, why is the problem only recently?) I do agree with you on the “glorification of violence” part. I’m rather old and I went to the most violent school in Flint: Emerson Jr. High during the riots). I personally witnessed gang violence, rapes, and beatings (several of which I got to enjoy) . There were way too many knives, but I never saw a single gun in the school. Guns weren’t viewed as a solution by anyone. Even though I had a gun of my own at a very early age (a 410), the thought of shooting anyone for the horrible way I was treated by a small fraction never crossed my mind. I viewed it, (and still do) as a coward’s way.

Another great post Dre. This falls in line with the point of yours I supported about not making the shooting political, about gun ownership, or a bunch of other things. Instead, this should be about what CAUSES these events. I think mental illness SHOULD be at the forefront of the conversation. How many more people have to die for the issue to even come into play?

Hey KC,
Another great point by you. If we keep ignoring these people, it’s going to come back around. the problem is twofold; first, it’s not taken as seriously as it should be, and secondly, it’s very expensive at a time when we’re running low on cash.

I have my theories as to why mental health is never brought into question. I think people tend to avoid the conversation thinking that even raising the issue criticizes and marginalizes those who are different. Political correctness has trumped everything in a time when perhaps it shouldn’t.

On that point, we can definitely agree. When criticized and brought to attention mentally ill people feel like lesser people. It encourages people to be in the closet when being able to get help from friends, when one is suffering, is very important. Stigma’s worst effect is that it deters people from accepting their illness and agreeing to treatment. If mentally ill people didn’t have the added burden of stigma, maybe more of them would seek treatment. And then tragedies like the one in Tucson would be less likely to happen.

Has anyone considered that denying people guns due to mental illness may cause them to not seek help? Couldn’t that be even worse? I love hunting and “cling” to my guns. If I were to believe that seeking help would cause me to lose my gun rights, I wouldn’t go. I know I’m not alone because this conversation came up on my radio show with some gun rights advocates. All the callers and comments backed that theory up.